Department of Hand Surgery, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, 050051, PR China.
Int J Surg. 2016 Oct;34:142-147. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.08.527. Epub 2016 Sep 1.
This study aims to evaluate whether volar locking plate was superior over non-locking plate in the treatment of die-punch fractures of the distal radius.
A total of 57 patients with closed die-punch fractures of the distal radius were included and analyzed. Of them, 32 were treated by non-locking plate (NLP) and the remaining 25 were treated by volar locking plate (VLP). Preoperative radiographs, computer tomographs and three-dimensional reconstruction, radiographs taken at immediate postoperation and at last follow-up were extracted and evaluated. Patients' electronic medical records were inquired and related demographic and medical data were documented. The documented contents were volar tilt, radial inclination, ulnar variance, grip strength, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores and complications.
VLP group demonstrated a significantly reduced radial subsidence of 1.5 mm (0.7 versus 2.2 mm), during the interval of bony union (P < 0.001), compared to NLP group. Larger proportion of patients (88% versus 62.5%) in VLP group gained acceptable joint congruity (step-off <2 mm) at the final follow-up (P = 0.037). No significant differences were observed between the groups in the measurements of volar tilt, radial inclination, DASH, VAS and grip strength recovery at the last follow-up. There was a trend of fewer overall complications (5/25 versus 10/32) and major complications that required surgery interventions (1/25 versus 4/32) in VLP than NLP groups, although the difference did not approach to significance (P = 0.339, 0.372).
VLP leaded to significantly better results of reduction maintainance and the final joint congruity than NLP, while reducing overall and major complications. However, the results should be treated in the context of limitations and the clinical significance of the difference required further studies to investigate.
本研究旨在评估掌侧锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端撕脱性骨折是否优于非锁定钢板。
共纳入 57 例闭合性桡骨远端撕脱性骨折患者,其中 32 例采用非锁定钢板(NLP)治疗,25 例采用掌侧锁定钢板(VLP)治疗。提取并评估术前 X 线片、计算机断层扫描和三维重建、术后即刻和末次随访时的 X 线片。查询患者的电子病历,记录相关人口统计学和医学数据。记录的内容包括掌倾角、桡骨倾斜角、尺骨变异、握力、上肢功能障碍评分(DASH)和视觉模拟评分(VAS)以及并发症。
VLP 组在骨愈合期间的桡骨下沉量明显减少 1.5mm(0.7 毫米对 2.2 毫米)(P<0.001),与 NLP 组相比。VLP 组有更大比例的患者(88%对 62.5%)在末次随访时获得可接受的关节吻合度(台阶<2mm)(P=0.037)。两组在末次随访时的掌倾角、桡骨倾斜角、DASH、VAS 和握力恢复测量值无显著差异。VLP 组的总体并发症(5/25 对 10/32)和需要手术干预的主要并发症(1/25 对 4/32)较少,尽管差异无统计学意义(P=0.339,0.372)。
VLP 组在维持复位效果和最终关节吻合度方面明显优于 NLP 组,同时减少了总体和主要并发症。然而,这些结果应在局限性和差异的临床意义的背景下进行评估,需要进一步研究来调查。